Literature DB >> 11028130

What are the relative merits of the sources used to identify potential research priorities for the NHS HTA programme?

D Chase1, R Milne, K Stein, A Stevens.   

Abstract

The NHS Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme runs an annual process of identifying suggestions for health technology assessment. The objective of this paper is to describe and evaluate the relative importance of the different sources used by the program in 1998 to identify potential priorities. There were four different sources: a) a widespread consultation of healthcare commissioners, providers and consumers; b) research recommendations from systematic reviews; c) reconsidering previous research priorities which had not been taken forward for funding; and d) horizon scanning. Collectively, the four sources generated just over 1,100 HTA suggestions. By far the largest source of suggestions and priorities was the widespread consultation. However, the success rate of this source, in terms of being commissioned, was low. Research recommendations from systematic reviews provided the second largest source of priorities and the best success rate of all sources. Value was found from different sources for different healthcare areas.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11028130     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462300102028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  6 in total

1.  Keeping pace with new technologies: systems needed to identify and evaluate them.

Authors:  A Stevens; R Milne; R Lilford; J Gabbay
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-11-13

2.  Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 16. Evaluation.

Authors:  Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Atle Fretheim
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2006-12-08

3.  The health systems' priority setting criteria for selecting health technologies: A systematic review of the current evidence.

Authors:  Mohammadreza Mobinizadeh; Pouran Raeissi; Amir Ashkan Nasiripour; Alireza Olyaeemanesh; Seyed Jamaleddin Tabibi
Journal:  Med J Islam Repub Iran       Date:  2016-02-16

4.  Using a co-production prioritization exercise involving South Asian children, young people and their families to identify health priorities requiring further research and public awareness.

Authors:  Logan Manikam; Rakhee Shah; Kate Reed; Gupreet Santini; Monica Lakhanpaul
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  Is Co-production Just a Pipe Dream for Applied Health Research Commissioning? An Exploratory Literature Review.

Authors:  Doreen Tembo; Elizabeth Morrow; Louise Worswick; Debby Lennard
Journal:  Front Sociol       Date:  2019-06-24

6.  Identifying research priorities for public health research to address health inequalities: use of Delphi-like survey methods.

Authors:  S Turner; E Ollerhead; A Cook
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2017-10-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.